To: Mark Hafner, City Manager
From: Julie Smith, Community Development Director
Subject:
Title
Consider a resolution approving a Site Plan Amendment with a variance for The Learning Experience, in an existing 10,209 square-foot building, situated on 1.54-acre property, located on the south side of Ridge Point Parkway, approximately 350 feet east of the Ridge Point Parkway and North Main Street (HWY 377) intersection, being Lot 1, Block A of the TLE Keller Addition, zoned Commercial (C), and addressed as 150 Ridge Point Parkway. Ramesh Tinnanooru, Applicant; Keller Entrepreneurs Group, LLC., Owner. (SP-22-0019)
Background:
On November 21, 2017, City Council approved a resolution with variances related to landscaping and screening wall requirements for The Learning Experience.
In September 2018, Staff approved the Civil Plans. However, a third submittal related only to civil engineering was submitted directly to Public Works that did not match the site plan of the previously approved plans. This later, civil submittal was approved independently (for civils only but included the unapproved site plan) so unfortunately created conflicting site plans. In other words, the Applicant’s engineer modified the site design between the complete submittal and the revised civil plan submittal. (Shortly after this, Staff changed submittal requirements to prevent such a misstep in the future by requiring all submittals to go through the Planner In Charge (PIC) to confirm consistency from one submittal to the next on all submittal sheets.)
In December 2018, the building permit was approved and issued. However, the initial contractor did not construct to the approved plans - neither the City Council approval nor the civil plans approved by staff. In particular, grading elevations impacting access to the building, parking lot lay-out (number of spaces and radii for fire apparatus), trail connections, and some utilities did not match approved plans. The drive access off Ridge Point Parkway did not meet the approved plans’ slope and was too steep. The Applicant removed and re-poured the access drive as well as portions of the parking lot/fire lane. These mistakes were discovered during City inspections.
The Applicant changed contractors and the City worked with the new contractor and Applicant to identify solutions and remedy the problems with as little reconstruction as possible and still meet UDC requirements. However, the required number of parking spaces cannot be met with the current constructed configuration. Also, because of the grade/elevation differences between the building and the parking lot, a wrought iron fence must be added around the entire building. Consequently, the Applicant is requesting a site plan amendment to reflect the changes and obtain a variance to the number of required parking spaces.
Site Layout:
The three main design changes from the originally approved site plan to the proposed amended site plan are located in the north part of the parking lot (fewer parking spaces), the added wrought iron fence around the entire building (to accommodate the elevation change), and removal of the western ADA ramp (because slope cannot accommodate; see discussion, below). Of the changes to the site plan, only the parking reduction requires a variance and recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission and approval by City Council. The others may be approved by staff. (Please See Exhibit A - Site Documents and Staff Attachment A - Approved Site Plan.)
Sidewalks and ADA Access:
There are two pedestrian accesses to the building, one located on the northeast side of the lot (front entrance) and one near the dumpster on the southwest side of the lot.
Plans indicated an ADA ramp with appropriate circulation on the west side of the building. However, the elevation grade on the west side cannot accommodate the requisite slope of an ADA ramp. Because the front entrance meets ADA requirements, this second ramp is not necessary per State law.
Parking:
Per UDC Section 8.07, the parking requirement for a child care use is one space per four students (design capacity) plus handicap. For this facility, 48 spaces are required. However, only 44 were constructed.
Variance Requested:
1. A variance to allow 44 spaces in lieu of the required 48 spaces.
Citizen Input:
A Site Plan application, even with variances, does not require a public hearing, so no public hearing notifications were sent out to the surrounding property owners for this request. The public will have an opportunity to speak on this agenda item during “Persons To Be Heard”.
Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation:
On June 28, 2022, the Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the proposed Site Plan Amendment with the following variance:
1. A variance to allow 44 spaces in lieu of the required 48 spaces.
Summary:
Section 2.07(A)(2) of the UDC lists criteria for approval of a variance, the City Council shall consider the following factors:
a. That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the land involved such that the strict application of the provisions of this Code would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land.
b. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or injurious to other properties in the area.
c. That the granting of the variance will not have the effect of preventing the orderly subdivision of other lands in the area in accordance with the provisions of this Code.
d. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a violation of any other valid ordinance of the City of Keller.
e. That strict compliance with the regulations, and/or that the purpose of the regulations will be served to a greater extent by the alternative proposal.
Alternatives:
The City Council has the following options when considering a Site Plan Amendment with a variance:
§ Approve as submitted (with requested variance).
§ Approve with modified or additional condition(s).
§ Table the agenda item to a specific date with clarification of intent and purpose.
§ Deny.